Network-based analysis revealed significant interactions between risk genes of severe COVID-19 and host genes interacted with SARS-CoV-2 proteins.

Whether risk genes of severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) from genome-wide association study could play their regulatory roles by interacting with host genes that were interacted with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) proteins was worthy of exploration. In this study, we implemented a network-based approach by developing a user-friendly software Network Calculator (https://github.com/Haoxiang-Qi/Network-Calculator.git). By using Network Calculator, we identified a network composed of 13 risk genes and 28 SARS-CoV-2 interacted host genes that had the highest network proximity with each other, with a hub gene HNRNPK identified. Among these genes, 14 of them were identified to be differentially expressed in RNA-seq data from severe COVID-19 cases. Besides, by expression enrichment analysis in single-cell RNA-seq data, compared with mild COVID-19, these genes were significantly enriched in macrophage, T cell and epithelial cell for severe COVID-19. Meanwhile, 74 pathways were significantly enriched. Our analysis provided insights for the underlying genetic etiology of severe COVID-19 from the perspective of network biology.

New "drugs and targets" in the GWAS era of bipolar disorder.

OBJECTIVE: Due to the phenotypic heterogeneity and etiological complexity of bipolar disorder (BD), many patients do not respond well to the current medications, and developing novel effective treatment is necessary. Whether any BD genome-wide association study (GWAS) risk genes were targets of existing drugs or novel drugs that can be repurposed in the clinical treatment of BD is a hot topic in the GWAS era of BD. METHODS: A list of 425 protein-coding BD risk genes was distilled through the BD GWAS, and 4479 protein-coding druggable targets were retrieved from the druggable genome. The overlapped genes/targets were subjected to further analyses in DrugBank, Pharos, and DGIdb datasets in terms of their FDA status, mechanism of action and primary indication, to identify their potential for repurposing. RESULTS: We identified 58 BD GWAS risk genes grouped as the druggable targets, and several genes were given higher priority. These BD risk genes were targets of antipsychotics, antidepressants, antiepileptics, calcium channel antagonists, as well as anxiolytics and analgesics, either existing clinically-approved drugs for BD or the drugs than can be repurposed for treatment of BD in the future. Those genes were also likely relevant to BD pathophysiology, as many of them encode ion channel, ion transporter or neurotransmitter receptor, or the mice manipulating those genes are likely to mimic the phenotypes manifest in BD patients. CONCLUSIONS: This study identifies several targets that may facilitate the discovery of novel treatments in BD, and implies the value of conducting GWAS into clinical translation.

Bidirectional genetic overlap between bipolar disorder and intelligence.

BACKGROUND: Bipolar disorder (BD) is a highly heritable psychiatric illness exhibiting substantial correlation with intelligence. METHODS: To investigate the shared genetic signatures between BD and intelligence, we utilized the summary statistics from genome-wide association studies (GWAS) to conduct the bivariate causal mixture model (MiXeR) and conjunctional false discovery rate (conjFDR) analyses. Subsequent expression quantitative trait loci (eQTL) mapping in human brain and enrichment analyses were also performed. RESULTS: Analysis with MiXeR suggested that approximately 10.3K variants could influence intelligence, among which 7.6K variants were correlated with the risk of BD (Dice: 0.80), and 47% of these variants predicted BD risk and intelligence in consistent allelic directions. The conjFDR analysis identified 37 distinct genomic loci that were jointly associated with BD and intelligence with a conjFDR < 0.01, and 16 loci (43%) had the same directions of allelic effects in both phenotypes. Brain eQTL analyses found that genes affected by the "concordant loci" were distinct from those modulated by the "discordant loci". Enrichment analyses suggested that genes related to the "concordant loci" were significantly enriched in pathways/phenotypes related with synapses and sleep quality, whereas genes associated with the "discordant loci" were enriched in pathways related to cell adhesion, calcium ion binding, and abnormal emotional phenotypes. CONCLUSIONS: We confirmed the polygenic overlap with mixed directions of allelic effects between BD and intelligence and identified multiple genomic loci and risk genes. This study provides hints for the mesoscopic phenotypes of BD and relevant biological mechanisms, promoting the knowledge of the genetic and phenotypic heterogeneity of BD. The essential value of leveraging intelligence in BD investigations is also highlighted.